Tensions in mentoring medical students toward self-directed and reflective learning in a longitudinal portfolio-based mentoring system – An activity theory analysis
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: In medical education, students need to acquire skills to self-direct(ed) learning (SDL), to enable their development into self-directing and reflective professionals. This study addressed the mentor perspective on how processes in the mentor-student interaction influenced development of SDL. METHODS: n = 22 mentors of a graduate-entry medical school with a problem-based curriculum and longitudinal mentoring system were interviewed (n = 1 recording failed). Using activity theory (AT) as a theoretical framework, thematic analysis was applied to the interview data to identify important themes. RESULTS: Four themes emerged: centered around the role of the portfolio, guiding of students' SDL in the context of assessment procedures, mentor-role boundaries and longitudinal development of skills by both the mentor and mentee. Application of AT showed that in the interactions between themes tensions or supportive factors could emerge for activities in the mentoring process. CONCLUSION: The mentors' perspective on coaching and development of reflection and SDL of medical students yielded important insights into factors that can hinder or support students' SDL, during a longitudinal mentor-student interaction. Coaching skills of the mentor, the interaction with a portfolio and the context of a mentor community are important factors in a longitudinal mentor-student interaction that can translate to students' SDL skills.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Coach compensation includes recognition.
“| Coach compensation | Recognition | [112,122,128] | |”
From Coaching in undergraduate and graduate medical education: a scoping review of success factors, barriers, and outcomes (2026) · cites this paper as [122]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 45 · Cited by 36
- Authors
- Heeneman, S., & de Grave, W.
- Affiliations
- Maastricht University (NL)
- School of Health Professions Education, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands;
- Corresponding author
- Heeneman, Sylvia
- ORCID
- Heeneman, Sylvia
- Venue
- Medical Teacher
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2017-02-08
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 368-376
- ISSN
- 0142-159X (ISSN-L)
- 1466-187X
- OpenAlex
- W2587627150
- Cited by
- 36
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5
- FWCI
- 1.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Medical Teacher (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mentoring and Academic Development
- Social Sciences › Education › Reflective Practices in Education
- Keywords
- mentoring, medical students, self-directed learning, reflective learning, activity theory, portfolio assessment, coaching skills, graduate entry medicine, problem-based learning
- MeSH terms
- Mentoring, Curriculum, Humans, Learning, Longitudinal Studies, Mentors, Students, Medical, Problem-Based Learning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review